religion ask me anything

Author: n8nrgmi ,

Topic's posts

Posts in total: 88
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    i'm a liberal christian. the consensus is that jesus existed. i believe the bible says that jesus is God, even though most arguments in that regard are weak. i believe the bible is inspired, but not error free, but would like to believe it's error free on essential theology. the noah story is an example of a myth, because i believe in miracles that have evidence for them, but the noah story is contradicted by science. there are examples of bible contradiction that show the bible is not always consistent, at least with best judgment, but it's hard to find a smoking gun contradiction.i think miracles and near death experiences help prove god, and to a lesser extent christianity. i think faith makes more sense than faith and works in that debate. i think catholic eucharist and pope as leader makes most sense historically and would consider calling myself liberal catholic or orthodox, because i think the pope should lead the church but that he's not infallible. i think something causing the universe makes most sense per causation and God. 
    feel free to ask about any topic. 
  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,303
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @n8nrgmi
    If you are not baptized or Chrismated as Orthodox, you are not really Orthodox.


    Would you consider becoming an Orthodox catechuman?

  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @Mopac
    yes i would consider it because they have the eucharist and are generally doing things the way the earliest christians are, and they believe the pope isn't infallible. unlike the orthodox though, i believe the pope is or should be the leader of the church, because that's what the historical evidence suggests.
    another reason i dont, is because it looks like most orthodox just make assumptions about what official teachings are, so you get followers following all kinds of different things and acting like it's official.... there's no good standard of authority.
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @Mopac
    why does your church choose to ignore the early evidence that the pope is the leader? why should mistakes on the part of the catholic church trump christian unity? or, do you think the two churches should reconvene with pope as the historical first among equals?

    Iranaeous, early church historian. one hundred something AD "It would be too tedious, in a work like this, to go through the succession lists of all the Churches.  We shall, therefore, take just one, the greatest, most ancient Church, the Church known to all, the Church founded and established in Rome by the two most glorious apostles, Peter and Paul.  By showing that the tradition which she received from the apostles, the faith which she proclaims to men, has come down to us through the succession of bishops, we confute all those who, in whatever manner,...set up conventicles.  With this Church, because of its more excellent origin, every Church (in other words, the faithful everywhere) must convene."

    cyprian. "the Church of Rome is the root and matrix of the Catholic Church" two hundred something AD 

  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,303
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @n8nrgmi

    Iranaeous certainly did not believe in Papal supremacy, and neither did the patriarchs of the other churches. That is actually part of the reason they are no longer Orthodox. Another big one is that they altered the creed of the church, which was ruled at not just 1, but 2 ecumenical councils to lead to anathema. The creed of the church cannot be altered except by another ecumenical council. 

    It isn't that I am ignoring the evidence as you say that the pope of Rome is the leader of the church, it is that the Orthodox Church never understood primacy as supremacy.

    When Rome broke away from the Orthodox Church, there were effectively 4 other "Popes" or Patriarchs more accurately. The Pope of Alexandria, the Patriarch of Constantinople, Antioch, and Jerusalem.



  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,303
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @n8nrgmi
    I'm surprised you think there is no standard of authority, or that we make assumptions about what the church teaches. 

    Maybe you don't really know how we do things.



  • BrotherDThomas
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 1,180
    2
    3
    7
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    BrotherDThomas
    --> @Mopac @n8nrgmi

    .

    n8nrgmi,

    With your ungodly dissertation, are you vying to be more dumbfounded and bible ignorant then the ever so inept "MOPAC?"  Just who in the hell do you think you are in deciding yourself, in what is a myth and what is not within the scriptures? Huh?  Where do you have any biblical authority to usurp Jesus' inspired words within His bible?  

    “EVERY WORD OF GOD IS FLAWLESS; he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.“ (Proverbs 30:5) 

    Jesus H. Christ, you represent just another FAKE Christian that is a minion of Satan at DebateArt!


    .

  • BrotherDThomas
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 1,180
    2
    3
    7
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    BrotherDThomas
    --> @Mopac @n8nrgmi



    .
    n8nrgmi,

    Listen, it is my Christian duty to make you aware of the number one minion of Satan at DebateArt named "MOPAC!"  HE IS THE LAST MEMBER OF DEBATEART THAT YOU SHOULD BE IN CONTACT WITH!  Mopac was obviously sent here by Satan Himself to proffer discord amongst TRUE Christians like myself.

    As explicitly shown in the link below, MOPAC has ridiculed Jesus' true words ad infinitum, tried to rewrite our Judeo-Christian bible, and at one point, he has called Jesus' words as "foolish!"  Furthermore, as shown, MOPAC refuses to address Jesus' words at times, but rather RUN AWAY from them instead!  All of these ungodly acts can be viewed at the following link on page 3 and forward!

    If there ever was a member of DebateArt that describes the godly passage below, it is MOPAC!

    "And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light." (2 Corinthians 11:14)


    As you can see in MOPAC's post #6 to you, he is already starting to act like a minion of Satan in disparaging your propositions, so beware!


    .








  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,001
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    --> @n8nrgmi
    Im currently running some test on what you wrote. 
    You said the bible says jesus is God. 

    A talking book you say? 
    What kind of trickery is this.?

    This bible of yours  , can you explain it to me pal .?

    Does it take batteries ?
    I have a number of Bibles here and not one of them has ever said a thing .
    Sound interesting. 
    Ok I've a few more experiments to run but i will get to you first with my findings. 

    One more thing , did it Say, ' Jesus is God ' in English ?
    God day.








  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,475
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @n8nrgmi
     the consensus is that jesus existed.

     I believe  Jesus existed too.

    i believe the bible says that jesus is God,

    Can you point out where in the Christian New Testament it states in clear language that "Jesus was god". 


    i believe the bible is inspired,

    By whom? Or what? And how?

    but not error free,

    That's correct.

    but would like to believe it's error free on essential theology.

    It isn't. I notice you say that you "would like to believe". 

    the noah story is an example of a myth,

    It may be an "example" of a myth, but can we be sure that the ancients were not relaying a story in the only way they understood what it was that was happening and experiencing at the time?


    because i believe in miracles that have evidence for them,

    Most of the so called "miracles" in the New Testament are easily explainable.... because they are not "miracles" in the sense that Christians would like them to be and believe them to be.
    And that goes for the OT too.

    but it's hard to find a smoking gun contradiction.

    No it isn't. there are many clear contradictions in the bible. The gospellers cannot agree on many things and are not consistent on many occasions. The day of the crucifixion is one and the day of the Christs birth is another. Of all the things that these gospellers should agree on it is those two dates.

    i think miracles and near death experiences help prove god,

    having an experience of nearly dying, is not evidence of a god.


     i think faith makes more sense than faith and works in that debate.

    That doesn't make any sense to me.


  • disgusted
    disgusted avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 4,959
    2
    3
    3
    disgusted avatar
    disgusted
    --> @BrotherDThomas
    Satan.
    OYG.
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @Stephen
    please show me a smoking gun bible contradiction. i'm pretty sure i'll be the one to show you how it's not. 
  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,001
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    --> @n8nrgmi
    Do you think you are currently in the top 1000 of people that have ever lived and are at translating scriptures ?

    Top 100?

    I've been known to play a little scriptures myself from time to time. 
    Yes thats correct.. i have you at last. 
    I'm a calling you out. YOU'VE BEEN SERVED. 
    SCRIPTURE TRANSLATION OFF bitch. 

    I challenge one, ( N8N ) to the scripture meaning challenge. 

    Someone WITNESS PLEASE.... 

    I'll see you later

  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,475
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    --> @n8nrgmi
    please show me a smoking gun bible contradiction. i'm pretty sure i'll be the one to show you how it's not. 

    I have given you two examples. If you are going to start playing silly fkn games we can end this discussion here.

    I have asked you -  Can you point  - where in the Christian New Testament it states in clear language that "Jesus was god"?

    You have ignored that question.

    I have asked you -  by whom? Or what? And how? After you say that you " believe the bible is inspired.

    You have ignored those questions also.

    After you said that " the Noah story is an example of a myth" I asked you -  " can we be sure that the ancients were not relaying a story in the only way they understood what it was that was happening and they were experiencing at the time?

    You have ignored that too.

    This doesn't come as a surprise to me and shouldn't be a surprise to anyone else either that you have responded to my questions with questions of your own. I have found this to be the usual response from religious apologists when they are actually challenged on anything they say. 

    And you haven't even responded to my opinions and or observations concerning your other statements. A discussion is a two way street. But apologist don't want it that way do they. 
  • BrotherDThomas
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    Debates: 2
    Forum posts: 1,180
    2
    3
    7
    BrotherDThomas avatar
    BrotherDThomas
    --> @Mopac @n8nrgmi @Stephen



    .
    n8nrgmi,

    After perusing this thread of yours, and as explicitly shown by you, it should be an outright embarrassment to you!  You are no more a TRUE Christian than the ever so inept MOPAC, as shown by his continued bible ignorance as well.


    The blatant reason why you should try and remove this thread to save further embarrassment is the following:

    1.  Any assumed Christian that doesn't know where in the Bible it shows Jesus to be Yahweh God should not even be in a religious forum.

    2.  When you Satanically state that the Great Flood is a myth, then you slap the faces of Matthew, Peter, Luke, and Paul in their New Testament writings because they mentioned Noah and the Great Flood in the following passages;  Matthew 24:38-39, Hebrews 11:7, 2 Peter 2:5, Luke 17:27, 1 Peter 3:-21.  Essentially, you are calling the aforementioned bible characters as LIARS which is blaspheme towards Jesus as God!

    3.  You are letting Stephen own you and your faith, when are you going to make an honorable stand in the name of Jesus with this anti-religionist?

    4.   Before you start pissing on another division of our faith in your post #4 towards the FAKE Christian MOPAC, learn about your division of our faith FIRST and FOREMOST instead, understood?


    I have never seen so many FAKE Christians on the internet, than at DebateArt!


    .
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @Stephen
    i was looking for detailed verses. here is an explanation at reconciling jesus' birth. you didn't give details so i won't either by breaking it down for you....

    the people in the new testament acted like the story of noah was a real event. the bible doesn't take the story as figurative, that's why so many fundamnetalists don't either. but the story contradicts science, so it's a myth. 
    1 Peter 3:20, KJV: "Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water."

    here are verses that say jesus is God
    Romans 9:5 - ...Christ, who is God over all, forever praised! Amen.

    Titus 2:13-15 - ...our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,

    Hebrews 1:8 - But about the Son he says, "Your throne, O God, will last for ever and ever"

    2 Peter 1:1 - ...the righteousness of our God and Savior Jesus Christ"

    at the beginning of the book of John... "In the beginning was the Word. And the Word was with God, and the Word was God. And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us". Jesus became flesh and dwelt amoung us.. Jesus is the word.

    In John, Jesus at one point says "unless you believe that I AM he, you will surely perish in your sins". only God is ever referenced to as I AM, and Jesus and everyone else knew it.

    this link has examples of miracles occurring. it has evidence of people seeing things out of their body while dead, through experiments and anecdotal evidence of credible people. you have no reasonable explanation for why there's such a consistency with near death experience stories... if it was just a hallucination it wouldn't be like that. to suggest there's a story embedded in our brain or genes is stupid and far fetched. 
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @BrotherDThomas
    i believe Jesus is my savior, i believe he is lord and that he rose from the dead. i believe all the bible definitions of what it means to be chrisitan. if you dont buy it, that means, you must not be the christian. or, more likely, you're a heretic. 

    the story of noah contradicts science.... you can't give reasonable or scientific explanations for it... try these questions out...

    taking the story of noah as true is admirable only for those new to the faith or children. for adults or those knowledgable, it becomes heresy to take the story of noah as literal. it's putting religion before the truth, and above God. 
  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @BrotherDThomas
    the science is overwhelming that that story of noah is a myth, a bible error
  • Deb-8-a-bull
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 1,001
    2
    2
    3
    Deb-8-a-bull avatar
    Deb-8-a-bull
    --> @n8nrgmi
    HAHAHAHAHA

    Why do you write like that?
    You start your sentences normal , understandable like,  then all of a sudden you say a persons name , like um mattew , Paul's or peter,  accompanied by a number and then the very next sentence or two sound  like you are in some kind of Shakespearian play.
    Why do you keep saying peoples names for mo apparent reason
    Its like this.

    We can see people around these times working long hours farming , fishing and rrŕrrrrrrrrr  Matthew 33 : 44  for the day is half long as 30 donkeys in a barn . 




  • Stephen
    Stephen avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 3,475
    3
    2
    2
    Stephen avatar
    Stephen
    The gospels were written by four different men to four unique audiences, so it is natural that they would include different details concerning the life of Christ.

    I agree.But this still doesn't explain away the discrepancies concerning the date of birth or the discrepancies concerning the day the Christ was crucified. But I can see this part of the argument going circular so I will leave that part there as it is very clear in the gospels that they do not get agree on the  most important days in the Christian calendar.
    One has to ask, why the silence from Mark and John concerning the "virgin birth"? The answer is simple; there wasn’t one in the sense that we today understand the word virgin. Not only did they not know about it, but they didn’t have a clue about the childhood of the saviour that didn't save himself never mind his people.either! This in turn must give rise to the question of why did Matthew and Luke, whose gospels are (in a large part) said to be borrowed from Mark, feel the need to mention a virgin birth? And we have to keep in mind that Mark is believed to have been the first of the gospels yet he has absolutely nothing to say about the virgin birth of Christ. 



    There is also the problem of the Christ's bloodline. which I will get to in a minute.



    But their writing was superintended by the Holy Spirit, who guaranteed that what each wrote was the absolute truth.

    You have no evidence whatsoever for that comment.


    There are differences, but they can all be harmonized.

    Now that is more nearer the truth. And by " CAN BE harmonized" I believe this means that you will change and alter verses and interpret words as so the gospel writers  do appear to be speaking as one. 


     The narratives of Jesus’ birth found in Matthew and Luke are not contradictory but complementary.

    You cannot deny that there are clearly two different genealogical sources coming from both these gospels Matthew and Luke; at Matthew 1:2-17 King James Version and Luke 3:23-38.KJV

    But Luke had this to add:

    “For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed among us. Even as they delivered them unto us, which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the word. It seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first, to write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus.”. Luke 1:1-3 KJV.


    Simply put, Luke is telling us above that these people (his sources) knew and perfectly understood what they were talking about and it was the truth that they were conveying to us (and Luke) because his sources had witnessed it all. And that it was ‘good enough for him’ so it should be good enough for us. Luke obviously couldn’t have known what Matthew had written in his genealogical list. So in layman's terms it meant 'accept it or kindly go away'.

    It is also interesting that Eusebius said this  in his History of the Church. "each believer has been only too eager to dilate at length on these passages”when referring to the bloodline lists of  Matthew 1:2-17 and and Luke 3:23-38.

    “to dilate”? One can only imagine translates as ‘who do you think you are looking at these genealogies with your eyes wide open’. Or ‘don’t allow your eyes to become too dilated, you may see the contradiction and know the truth’.  It does beg the question as to why Matthew and Luke even took the time to add these genealogical lists to their gospels because they should instantly throw doubt (for the Christian) as to the divinity of Jesus and his very existence and are therefore pointless because we cannot after all, forget that Mary, Jesus’ mother was a virgin, wasn’t she? What is more, we have the two evangelists, Matthew and Luke, both showing us that Joseph is the direct descendant of King David. And this is not to mention that they don’t even agree as to whom Joseph’s father of was:

    “And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary”. Matthew 1:17.KJV 

    Luke 3:23;  “Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being the son of Joseph, the son of Heli”.KJV

     

  • zedvictor4
    zedvictor4 avatar
    Debates: 13
    Forum posts: 2,578
    3
    2
    3
    zedvictor4 avatar
    zedvictor4
    --> @BrotherDThomas
    The Bible is clearly a Mythology.

    The "Flood" is possibly an inclusion relative to an extensive reginal flood event. Though, the "Noah Story" is totally illogical and therefore a fanciful embellishment.

    And you assume that you are a Christian, because you were taught to assume that you are a Christian.

    And as hypotheses go, Christianity like it's Sister and Brother Religions are absurdly "pissing" into the wind.
  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,303
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @n8nrgmi
    How can you call yourself a Christian if you don't believe Jesus is God?




  • Dr.Franklin
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Debates: 32
    Forum posts: 8,289
    4
    6
    11
    Dr.Franklin avatar
    Dr.Franklin
    --> @n8nrgmi
    3 words

    Liberal Christian, abortion??

  • n8nrgmi
    n8nrgmi avatar
    Debates: 0
    Forum posts: 811
    2
    2
    3
    n8nrgmi avatar
    n8nrgmi
    --> @Mopac
    you must be missing where i'm arguing that jesus is god and citing scripture to back that up. 
  • Mopac
    Mopac avatar
    Debates: 4
    Forum posts: 7,303
    3
    4
    7
    Mopac avatar
    Mopac
    --> @n8nrgmi
    Yes, you did say you believe scripture supports this view. I got that part.

    Maybe what I am really asking is if you believe that Jesus Christ is God.